Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Kevin P. O'Brien Kevin P. O’Brien of Hartog, Baer & Hand.

Before the appellate court’s decision in Barefoot v. Jennings (2018) 27 Cal. App. 5th 1, trust litigators assumed that former trust beneficiaries, i.e., beneficiaries disinherited by a subsequent trust amendment, had standing under Probate Code section 17200 to challenge the validity of that trust amendment in probate court. Barefoot upended this assumption, holding that section 17200 is only available to current trust beneficiaries and that former beneficiaries, like the petitioner in Barefoot, must initiate a separate civil action to seek relief.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.